Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
Mon Dec 15, 2014, 09:43 PM Dec 2014

"Our Nation's Most Important Verb Conjugation Is All About Elizabeth Warren"

Our Nation's Most Important Verb Conjugation Is All About Elizabeth Warren
12/15/14

Warren says she's not running for president. Let's try this question a new way.

Elizabeth Warren said it again, and again. She's not running for president. This time, Warren was talking to NPR's Steve Inskeep, who like many in Washington, pointed out that Warren keeps using the present tense when she describes her presidential aspirations–leaving open the possibility that she might decide to run in the future, like in the first quarter of 2015.

INSKEEP: You're putting that in the present tense, though. Are you never going to run?

WARREN: I am not running for president.

INSKEEP: You're not putting a "never" on that.

WARREN: I am not running for president. You want me to put an exclamation point at the end?

The interview caught the attention of both the right and the far left—with the Republican National Committee blasting out the remarks in an email where they noted that "Democratic insiders aren't buying" her denials. Within minutes, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee also focused on Warren's words, shooting out an email that recounts the work that the group has done for her. "The way for Democrats to inspire the public is to give Americans the debate about big ideas that we deserve–and that means following Elizabeth Warren's lead," said Stephanie Taylor, the committee's co-founder.

This debate about the senator's choice of verb tense has been going on since at least last year, when the New Republic floated the notion that a Warren candidacy would amount to a "nightmare" for Hillary Clinton. Shortly after that piece hit the newsstands in late 2013, the Boston Globe's Noah Bierman questioned Warren at length during a news conference. Bierman honed in on her verb choice, got the now-standard rebuff, and then tried another angle of attack that Washington journalists might find more fruitful to copy: Will Warren promise to finish her six-year term in the Senate? (She's up again in 2018.)

Warren's answer in December 2013: "I pledge to serve out my full term."

Since then a number of groups have been trying to change Warren's mind, including the Ready for Warren super-PAC, MoveOn.org and a group of former staff to President Barack Obama. She also took center stage over the weekend arguing against the $1.1 trillion cromnibus legislation because of riders that water down regulations on financial institutions, which is partly what prompted Inskeep to revisit the verb conjugation question.

It's a quandary for any politician, who generally are advised to never-say-never to the presidential question. After all, no one can predict with certainty the dynamics of a race.

Leaving that tiny amount of wiggle room keeps her relevant—and leaves the national media and her legions of supporters scrutinizing her words—without exposing her to the criticism she would attract during a national campaign. That national network gives her power, it's useful for raising cash, for flooding the Senate phone lines when a key piece of legislation is being debated and filling auditoriums when she's out campaigning. (We don't see photos of half-empty Warren events, unlike another star Democrat.)....

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2014-12-15/our-nations-most-important-verb-conjugation-is-all-about-elizabeth-warren


12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"Our Nation's Most Important Verb Conjugation Is All About Elizabeth Warren" (Original Post) RiverLover Dec 2014 OP
She's Running! NYC_SKP Dec 2014 #1
Really? What's her position on war crime trials for Bush&Cheney? Nt pkdu Dec 2014 #2
What are anyone's who might run for president? RiverLover Dec 2014 #4
You don't?....why not?.....aren't you one of these excoriating Obama for not charging pkdu Dec 2014 #5
Not really. It's not going to happen, so I can't get upset about it. RiverLover Dec 2014 #7
She is going to name Hillary the new Attorney General, and then.... NYC_SKP Dec 2014 #11
Cute non-answer.....to a question you and others don't want asked. Nt pkdu Dec 2014 #12
hmmmm, I just don't know... RiverLover Dec 2014 #3
Gary Hart 2008!!... SidDithers Dec 2014 #6
Al Gore 2004? wyldwolf Dec 2014 #8
Who did you vote for in 2008 and 2012? morningfog Dec 2014 #9
Very good Q. nt RiverLover Dec 2014 #10

pkdu

(3,977 posts)
5. You don't?....why not?.....aren't you one of these excoriating Obama for not charging
Mon Dec 15, 2014, 10:05 PM
Dec 2014

Bush and Cheney?

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
7. Not really. It's not going to happen, so I can't get upset about it.
Mon Dec 15, 2014, 10:09 PM
Dec 2014

What I care about is what will happen moving forward. I guess we'll know soon enough EW's position on torture. If she's all for it, I won't vote for her. Promise. But I'm not worried. She's actually a true liberal.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
11. She is going to name Hillary the new Attorney General, and then....
Mon Dec 15, 2014, 10:29 PM
Dec 2014

...there won't even be a trial.

The two criminals will be disappeared.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Our Nation's Most I...